Laionidas

First Assault Rep: 1,960

Posts: 151

Member
Recently, I created a thread on range estimation and CBC choice. However, a lot of questions remained unanswered, and in fact gave rise to even more questions. It seemed like no one knew how damage drop-off actually works. So, @Reijiphantom and I have conducted some extensive tests, both on the shooting range, as well as in closed environment "custom matches". We gained a lot, and by that I mean a lot of information from these tests. What we found was interesting, and at times astonishing, going directly against what was expected. Below I have listed a summary of our findings. Some of the listed "findings" are actually common knowledge, that is however reiterated for the sake of clarifying subsequent findings that are not. We might also update, edit, or add to this guide in the future.

and 3 others. - A weapon's range stat determines the maximum Optimal range
- At Optimal range, the weapon's damage is a flat number determined by the weapon's damage stat
- A weapon's Effective range lies between the maximum Optimal range and Extreme range which starts at a fixed non-listed distance (the maximum Effective range)
- A weapon's Extreme range is anything past Effective range
- Damage drop-off at a given distance is always the same, there is no RNG involved here
- At Effective range, the damage drop-off becomes gradually less. There is more drop-off against more distant targets, but the rate with which the damage drops off is higher closer to Optimal range. It means that a weapon with a base damage of 30 and a maximum Optimal range of 15(m) might do only 27 damage at 17(m), 25 at 19(m), and 24 at 21(m). So while the damage drop-off does not actually get less, it goes from -3 per 2(m) to -2, and subsequently -1 per 2(m). This is completely opposite of what one would expect
- At Extreme range the drop-off is entirely fixed. The weapon does a minimum amount of damage, regardless of whether the target is 70(m), 60(m), or 50(m) away, or even 1(m) past the maximum Effective range
- Because at Optimal range a weapon's damage is a flat number, the CBC1 also gives a flat +10% buff at that range, and is thus a solid choice
- Because at Effective range a weapon's damage becomes gradually less, the CBC2's buff also becomes gradually less. This means that a weapon doing e.g. 27 damage at Optimal range +2(m), gets a +2.7 (+3 rounded up) damage buff, while the same weapon only gets a +2.4 (+2 rounded down) damage buff at Optimal range +6(m). It also means that, in this case, at Optimal range +2(m), the CBC2 completely negates damage drop-off. In reality, because damage drop-off is low close to Optimal range, despite the gradient being steeper than at greater distances, the +10% buff from the CBC2 will often be higher than the damage drop-off at range between say Optimal range +0(m) and Optimal range +5(m). This in turn potentially makes the CBC2 one of the most valuable attachments out there, as it could for example provide a significant buff to SMG's in the critical 15(m)-20(m) range
- Because at Extreme range a weapon's damage is a flat number again, the CBC3 also gives at flat +10% buff at that range, but this 10% will be significantly lower than the CBC1's or CBC2's. It does cover a much larger distance spectrum, as it affects anything past maximum Effective range, but in general the CBC3 isn't worth it unless you want to push your damage past a very specific treshold, like from 31 to 34 damage, warranting a three-shot kill even at Extreme ranges
- Range reductions from supressor muzzles only affect maximum Optimal range, not maximum Effective range. This means that while damage drop-off sets in earlier, it do so less steeply. The maximum Effective range remains fixed after all, and the minimum amount of damage at Extreme range is also fixed. The gradual damage drop-off at effective range is simply stretched out across a wider distance spectrum. So, the range reduction is most felt at Effective range, close to Optimal range, but hardly noticeable the closer you get to Extreme range. As the range at which the negative effect is most felt overlaps with the range at which the CBC2 is most effective, the two attachments seem to complement eachother perfectly
- This is by far the weirdest finding we did: the +damage barrels add a flat amount of damage at any range. I always assumed it added a flat amount of damage to the weapon's base damage stat, and was subsequently subject to damage drop-off, but this does not seem to be the case. The damage seems to be added only after the drop-off. A barrel granting +3 damage at Optimal range still adds the same +3 damage at Extreme range. The +damage barrels are therefore relatively the most effective of weapons with high damage drop-off and a low base damage stat, but really they are a must have on every single weapon ingame for which they are available

Follow us on

## Comments

I think using the CBC2 has less to do with the base damage of a weapon and more with it's range. I would say that most combat that is not around a corner and in your face takes place somewhere between 15-20M. That means that if, for example, if you take the Seburo C26-A with a range of 15, most mid-range combat would take place just outside of it's effective range, meaning that damage starts dropping fast. The CBC2 is a great option for that weapon because it enhances the ranges of 15M to 27M, which is a range where you're very likely to have encounters. The fact that it does only 26 base damage in optimal range doesn't really matter, because all you're doing is basically extending it's range. However, in this case using the damage barrel is probably a good idea, otherwise the -5% in Optimal range will just deny you that 4-shot damage capability.

However, in the case of, say, the S25-R with it's range of 22M, you enhance the range between 22M and 30M, where, at least per my experience, hardly any encounters take place. So in this case I would go for the CBC1, because it enhances everything from close range to mid range and only makes me lose out in longer distance fights.

So it depends mostly on the weapon's range what CBC you can best equip, if at all. If you think the damage buff at a certain range isn't worth it because it doesn't cross a threshold between, for example, being a 4-hit or a 3-hit kill, then you might be better off with a laser pointer to increase accuracy.

No, I wouldn't dare to recommend ALWAYS going for a certain attachement, except with the +damage barrel. Especially the CBC

2is a finicky piece of kit, as @Reijiphantom has allready explained. I do recommend ONLY mounting the CBC3when pushing for X-shot kill potential, but that doesn't work the other way around either. If you have a choice between reaching a certain damage treshold by using just a CBC or a +damage barrel, the +damage barrel is usually the better choice.If you have an AR that does 36 damage at Optimal range, then yes a CBC

2will enable you to maintain that 3-shot kill potential at longer ranges, without compromising on Optimal range (5% of 36 < 2 and 36 - 2 > 34). However damage drop-off will still determine up to how far into Efective range you'll be able to maintain 3-shot kill potential, and you'll be handicapping yourself at Extreme range. At say 34 damage, the CBC2would be a downright bad choice, as you might maintain 3-shot kill potential in Effective range up to a certain distance, but you'll lose that potential within Optimal range (5% of 34 > 1 and 34 - 1 < 34).The CBC

1can be used whenever, as it ups a weapon's highest damage. The fact that it provides a disadvantage at Effective and Extreme ranges is not necessarily an issue, when the weapon's intended use falls entirely within Optimal range, such as can be the case with SR's, SMG's, or Shotguns, but that's entirely dependent on playing style.I went into the ghost screen and took a look to the kill per meter graph. And i just realized that 77% of my kill were in my optimal range when "only" 15 % of them were in the effective range.

It basically means I have much more to win by increasing my optimal range damage than the later.

Yet , I don't know if playing with a CBC1 is usefull when my Seburo C-30 already have 37+3 damage.

The only thing i can think about is the Damage drop off coming from the limb shot.

I mean , let's say a bullet in the arms only do about 75% of the normal damage,

Then if i'm in the optimal range : the enemi will take 37*75/100 = 27,5 damage + 3 from the barrel so 30,5.

If i use a CBC1 then , i can had up to 3,7 which means 34,2 damage and barely make it to the 3-shot.

Problem : Do we know the exact percentage of reduction from a arms shot or leg shot ?

Personally I have the CBC3 on my Seburo C30 because I like to use it in longer ranges and the CBC3 +damage barrel pushes it over the three-shot kill limit in extreme range at the cost of a little extra damage in optimal and effective range. But I basically use it like a sniper now, so if you really stick to close quarters combat, the CBC1 is probably still a better option. That's the fun of the attachment system, you can mod it the way

youlikeIF77% of your kills were in Optimal range, precisely because of the above, you might benefit more from increasing your chance to kill at Effective range. If the kills from that 77% are mostly guaranteed, increasing your kill potential at Effective range, where you seem to get less kills, will be much more advantageous overall: that way you'll be adding to that 77%. In fact, it might be that you're getting only 15% of your kills at Effective range, not because that's the preferred range you engage in, but because you simply fail to make the kill more often in comparison to at Optimal range. Now it will probably never turn over completely, but achieving something like 68% Optimal and 21% Effective range does not sound too unrealistic. If the number of kills you make at Optimal range then stays the same, it means you're getting more kills overall.Most of my last month kill 've been done with the C30 , and even if i have a deathstalker evo and a MG, i don't really feel like i'm better when using the smg instead of the AR in close range for instance ( My friends keep on joking about how bad i'm with headshot (0.21 kill per HS , when they have around 0.30 , but anyway I end up with more kill by shooting the body so who cares ... )

I feel the hitbox for the head is quite different from my last fps ( CSS a few years ago ^^") , so i feel like losing a bit accuracy over dam wouldn't hurt me much

What you both say makes sense so I feel like spending what little money the incomming gold chest will give me into some CBC.

I'll probably try the CBC2 first and compare over a week.

Thx for the guide once again.

From what I've read, it sounds like weapons have 2 damage and two range stats. Optimal(near) Range, (Near) damage -> Extreme(far) Range, Far Damage. EG. Weapon X with Optimal Range: 24m, Damage = 36 (hidden stats: Far Range = 45m, Far Damage = 20). From your statements about damage vis-a-vis suppressors, this model seems to fit your findings.

Assuming this is correct, I'd be interested if you checked whether damage modifiers (excluding barrel) are calculated from optimal or actual damage. (E.G. would a weapon shooting through Maven barrier with Damage = 26, Far Damage = 15 have a final damage of: 12 damage, 7 damage, or 15 damage? ) Previous testing seemed to indicate damage was in fact rounded and not truncated,

The interesting part though is what lies in between the known damage and range stat and the hidden damage and range stat. That's Effective range (with a capital 'E'), and the damage within that range spectrum, seems to follow an inverse logarithmic curve between the known and hidden damage stats. This inverse nature, especially combined with a fix stat before and after it, I find very,

veryunusual. The +damage barrel was the only one hard-tested. It's applied after damage drop-off, and does not scale along with a weapon's core damage, making it insanely powerfull.The CBCs' stats are procentual, which makes them more balanced as attachments. However, we haven't hard tested whether that percentage is calculated over Optimal damage (known stat) or actual damage (inverse logarithmic scale to hidden stat). It would be a relatively difficult thing to test too, as at Effective range it would require a lot of manual calculations to compensate for 'natural' drop-off difference, to determine what the CBC is actually doing. We've assumed it's calculated over actual damage. Would it be calculated over Optimal damage, it would make the CBC2 stronger (bigger buff, more or less same debuffs), and the CBC1 weaker (same buff, bigger debuffs), while the CBC3 would stay at roughly the same level (notably bigger buff, but also bigger debuff).

Maven's barrier or Borma's nano-gel we haven't touched at all, but it'd indeed be interesting to see how that affects actual damage.

Got a chance to reproduce your findings (Damage barrel raises both near and far damage at identical levels, inverse curve for Eff range. etc) as well as confirm the CBC calculated on effective and not base damage.

As for effective range, I'd propose that they're class based and not individually set or optimal based. (this hypothesis held true for limb multipliers, I'd posit that they wouldn't have a different reference db for the same function call.)

All that being considered, the weapon class I see with an Effective range large enough to justify CBC2 would be shotguns, ironically enough. (Effective range on most work out to be 2x optimal, and high per slug values offer a breakpoint significant buff. ) Unfortunately, I had this realization after @cycatrix and I finished testing, so I can't comment on what Far damage is for SGs.. (if you're feeling up for a testing challenge, try specifically hitting only single pellets in a reliable manner at 21-30m. Unlike recoil, it seems that SG bursts are actually random XD)

------

Completely unrelated to anything, but can anyone explain to me how in the GITS universe they've been able to find small and powerful enough battery tech to power tanks and full prosthetic bodies, but still prefer to use firearms over coilguns or direct energy weapons?

needthe CBC2 to make it an effective weapon again. However, if you equip the CBC2, I feel like it performs better than it ever did before the nerf. I don't like that you would need a mod for a weapon to do what it was meant to do (like the damage barrel on most snipers), but with the ICS, I'd say that's where we are right now. I already tested the KSG with any of the range-finders, but that doesn't make it any better. I had hoped it would fix the weapon as well, but it doesn't give you any more guarentee of a kill on any range. I haven't tested the USS12 yet, but I expect the CBC2 would work well, if it doesn't gimp your short range too much.Small sidenote, after 25M you actually move outside of the Shotgun's "Extreme Range" and you just get "Out of Range".

I do actually also use the CBC2 on SMGs a lot because, even if the range is not as large as optimal range (in some cases), it can improve that range where I find most of my encounters taking place.

As for the energy weapons, I'd say it's quite simple. Projectile weapons have been perfected over decades, heck, centuries of time while energy weapons are still in the very

veryearly stages of development. The energy source is not the only problem, but,for example, how to have it unload as much of it's energy as possible in one burst or how to make a lense strong enough to focus that energy into a precise beam while still being small enough to be carried around. If you prefer to go for railguns, you have the problem of it's immense kick to worry about, not even mentioning the fact that it melts your barrel after one shot, after you figure out how to make it effective and, once again, the proper size. On top of that you don't just have to find an answer to these and other practical problems, but you also have to make them effective and affordable enough to replace the projectile weapons we have now. Plus, and this is the weakest point of all but still worth mentioning, they have to do that in about 15 years from now.And then I haven't even mentioned the glaring downsides to the use of energy-based weapons. I may not know much about real-life guns, but I know my science-fiction :P

As for energy weapons. Might be a problem with heat dispersal. With a gun the casings can disperse heat, as can an open bolt mechanism. Gun aren't vulnerable to EMP either, coil guns are. And if kuro's ability is anything to take as lore (it doesnt but whatever) then mech bodies seem to at least have shielding around vitals, but not around most of their body. Also cyborgs eat cyborg food so it wouldn't be weird if they had some mechanical gut like system that takes most of the space in their torso.

The big optimal range penalty actually seems to increase its overall average damage given the fact you're increasing the size of the zone where the 10% damage boost occurs, provided the -5% to the now near-point-blank optimal range doesnt reduce TTK at all.

A rule of thumb seems to be something like Suppressor + CBC2 for any weapon with 15m range or lower, and CBC1 with a cross/star muzzle for anything with 20m+ ranges. I'm not sure if there are any standout exceptions where a CBC2 would reduce the shots to kill at optimal range given that all SMGs i've found with 15m range or under would not go from a 4 to a 5 shot kill with a 5% damage penalty, but i may have missed one.

In a lot of cases above it seems the shorter range weapons don't get the long barrel options that increase damage and range, so you're stuck with the 2001 stability/accuracy barrel, but this only further supports the use of suppressor + cbc2 to vastly increase the effective range zone.

Increasing the zone where the 10% damage boost occurs with a +4 stability muzzle and CBC2 will still lower your maximum DPS with a weapon. This is offset by gaining a higher sub-maximum DPS in situations, where it can matter a lot, but it is still something you need to consider. Also, the danger of saying that

"you probably want to use a +4 Stability Suppressor muzzle on every weapon that you use the CBC2 on", is that the reason you use that CBC2 to begin with might be that same +4 stability muzzle.Generally speaking though, I think you hit the nail on the head. The damage stats and barrel options on short range SMG's are indeed so that they strongly favour the afore mentioned combination.

I'm thinking of buying an AK and going with both the damage barrel and CBC3. Damage at below extreme range is good enough anyway, and damage at optimal range will still be top notch, so buffing the weapon's performance at extreme range seems sensible. One problem though: I haven't got any moneh to actually go and buy/build it =P

You could always try the CBC3 on the SCAR or the KH-417 (if you were around to get it for free) and see how that goes. It should be a comparable experience.

That said I think the CBC2 would actually be better on the AK because there should be a "sweet spot" where the gives just enough damage to keep the gun at 44 damage, effectively increasing the range where one could get a 3 limbshot kill.

You do 39 dmg on body and 30 dmg on limbs with AK1(+3Barrel, cbc3), 34/35 body dmg and 27 limb dmg you do with AK2(+3Barrel, no cbc) on extreme range.

That means that you do over 100 dmg with Ak1 with 2 bodyshots + 1 limbshot, with Ak2 its only 99 dmg. But the disadvantage is, that you wont kill with AK1 an enemy on short range with just 3 limbshots, where AK2 would kill the enemy. (AK1 = 32 limb, AK2 = 34 limb)

Therefore I think that its even best to use lasersight or cbc1 on AK, since you can get up to 48 dmg, which is almost 2 shot and often usefull vs enemies in long demorounds when they arent full hp. AK3(+3Barrel,cbc1) still deals 34body dmg on extreme range, which is 3 hit and 25 limb dmg which is 4 hit. So you can use without any penalty cbc1 on AK and you still need only 4 shots in the worst case.

That makes a lot of sense.

I don't play Demo at all though, and stubbornly refuse to build for limbshots (since that "rewards poor aim",.. no not really, but you get the point).

Full on accuracy would thus make the most sense to me. People might think the AK allready has plenty, but you have to bear in mind that high initial accuracy also reduces the spread of subsequent shots, so it can to some extend be used as compensation for stability as well. In my experience this mechanic works exceptionally well when hipfiring at close range, but less well for prolonged fire at longer ranges.